- Email: [email protected]
Water consumption, crop coefficient and leaf area relations of a Vitis vinifera cv. 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Agricultural Water Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat
Water consumption, crop coefficient and leaf area relations of a Vitis vinifera cv. 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard Sarel Munitzb,c, Amnon Schwartzc, Yishai Netzera,b,
T
⁎
a
Department of Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology and Materials, Ariel University, Ariel 40700, Israel The Eastern Regional Research and Development Center, Ariel 40700, Israel c R.H. Smith Institute of Plant Science and Genetics in Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 76100, Israel b
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Crop coefficient Drainage lysimeters Evapotranspiration Leaf area index Vitis vinifera Water consumption
Most cultivated vineyards worldwide are located in semi-arid and arid regions with a limited water supply. Skilled vineyard water management is considered the main tool for controlling vegetative growth and grape quality and for ensuring vineyard sustainability. Imposing an appropriate drought stress at a suitable phenological stage can improve wine quality with almost no yield reduction. A comprehensive irrigation model enabling precise vineyard irrigation should be based on changes in vine water consumption as a function of climate conditions and canopy area. In 2011, six drainage lysimeters were constructed within a commercial 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard located in the central mountains of Israel. Data were collected during six successive years from 2012 – 2017. The daily vine water consumption, ETc (L day−1), was calculated by subtracting the amount of collected drainage (over a 24 h period) from the amount of applied irrigation during the same time period. Seasonal water consumption (ETc) was 715 mm season−1 on average, while seasonal calculated reference evapotranspiration (ETo) was 1237 mm season−1 on average. Maximal crop coefficient (Kc) was 0.8 – 0.9, meaning that actual water consumption was lower than the calculated reference evapotranspiration. Maximal leaf area index (LAI) was 0.9 to 1.7 m2 m-2. The multi-seasonal linear correlation between LAI and Kc was strongly positive and significant. The robust multiyear relationship between LAI & Kc proves that measuring canopy area of wine grapevines is a reliable approach for estimating their Kc. The LAI to Kc relationship that we have established can be used as a basis for developing a comprehensive irrigation model for wine grapevines that integrates both climatic conditions and canopy area.
1. Introduction Most cultivated vineyards worldwide are located in semi-arid and arid regions, in which water resources are scarce (Chaves et al. 2007). Precise vineyard water management is essential in those areas to enable sustainable production of grapevines (Fereres and Evans, 2006; Romero et al., 2010). In wine grape cultivation, water has additional importance, since skilled vineyard water management is considered the main tool for controlling vegetative growth and grape quality and for ensuring vineyard sustainability (Bravdo et al., 1985; Chaves et al., 2010; Fereres and Evans, 2006; Keller et al., 2008; Munitz et al., 2016; Romero et al., 2010). Imposing an appropriate drought stress at a suitable phenological stage can improve wine quality with almost no yield reduction (Girona et al., 2009; Intrigliolo and Castel, 2010; Munitz
⁎
et al., 2016; Romero et al., 2013; Williams and Araujo, 2002). Conversely, imposing severe drought stress at inappropriate phenological stages can cause significant yield loss and even a decrease in quality in extreme cases (Bravdo et al., 1985; Chaves et al., 2010; Esteban et al., 2001; Grimes and Williams, 1990; Medrano et al., 2003; Munitz et al., 2016). Continuous severe drought stress will dramatically reduce vegetative growth and shorten the lifespan of the vineyard. A non-stress irrigation strategy is also problematic, since excessive irrigation is costly and may cause vigorous vegetative growth that leads to shading of clusters and reduced quality (Bureau et al., 2000; Chorti et al., 2010; Gao and Cahoon, 1994; Morrison and Noble, 1990). In addition, overirrigating may increase the need for canopy management practices and also lead to percolation of water below the root zone, leaching nitrates and other chemicals into groundwater reservoirs (Di and Cameron,
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (Y. Netzer).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2019.03.051 Received 8 January 2019; Received in revised form 29 March 2019; Accepted 29 March 2019 0378-3774/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
2017 at 'Kida' vineyard, located in the central mountain region of Israel (lat 32.2 °N, long. 35.1 °E), 759 m above sea level. The climate at the experimental site is characterized as semi-arid with predominant winter rainfall of 415 mm, warm days (maximum > 30 °C) and relatively cool nights (minimum < 20 °C) during the growing season. The soil is deep, stone-free terra rossa comprising 36.4% sand, 30.6% silt and 33% clay, with bulk density of 1.25 g cm−3. The commercial vineyard was planted during 2007 with Vitis vinifera cv. 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vines grafted onto 110 Richter rootstock. During 2011, similar four-year-old vines were replanted, one in each of the six lysimeter tanks. Vine spacing was 3 m between rows and 1.5 m between vines, i.e. 2222 vines per hectare. Lysimeters were constructed while conserving commercial vineyard spacing. Row orientation was east/west and the vines were trained to a VSP training system with two foliage wires. The vines were designed as a bi-lateral cordon and pruned during the winter to 16 spurs (8 per cordon), each comprising two buds. Except for irrigation, lysimeter vines were treated by following the local commercial vineyard growing practices (pest and weed control, canopy management, pruning).
2002; Keller, 2005; Watts et al., 1991). Moreover, excessive irrigation may lead to fungal infection and cluster rotting. A comprehensive irrigation model enabling precise vineyard irrigation should be based on changes in vine water consumption as a function of climate conditions and canopy area (Allen et al., 2006; Netzer et al., 2009). The term evapotranspiration (ET) refers to the total amount of water that is transpired through the plant canopy and evaporated from the soil surface (Allen et al., 2006). The main factors affecting ET are the canopy area and architecture, evaporative power of the atmosphere (ETo), stomatal conductance and soil type (Allen et al., 2006). The reference evapotranspiration (ETo) of a well-watered 12-cm-high grassy surface that fully covers the ground is calculated using meteorological data from the FAO Penman-Monteith equation (Allen et al., 2006; Doorenbos and Pruitt, 1977). Measuring crop evapotranspiration (ETc) and relating it to reference evapotranspiration (ETo) is the standard procedure for determination of crop coefficient (Kc) used for skilled irrigation management (Allen et al., 2006; Netzer et al., 2009; Williams et al., 2003). Kc is defined as the ratio between the actual crop evapotranspiration (ETc) and reference evapotranspiration (ETo), i.e. Kc = ETc/ETo. Since biotic and abiotic stress on the crop may affect its water consumption (Allen et al., 1998; Netzer et al., 2014), standard Kc needs to be determined on plants that are disease-free, well-fertilized and achieving full production, grown in a large field under optimum soil water conditions (Allen et al., 2006). Kc varies along the growing season as a function of leaf area index (LAI) dynamics, the solar radiation intercepted by the canopy and the phenological stage of the crop (Allen et al., 2006; Doorenbos and Pruitt, 1977; Evans et al., 1993; Jagtap and Jones, 1989; Netzer et al., 2009; Peacock et al., 1987; Williams et al., 2003). The Kc values of grapevines may vary with agricultural practices and trellising architecture (Williams and Ayars, 2005; Williams and Fidelibus, 2016). Kc has two components – Ke, soil evaporation, and Kcb, plant transpiration, i.e. Kc = Ke + Kcb (Allen et al., 2006). Grapevine ETc has been measured and estimated with different techniques such as microclimatological methods (Carrasco-Benavides et al., 2012; Oliver and Sene, 1992; Yunusa et al., 2004), soil moisture (Van Zyl and Van Huyssteen, 1980; Prior and Grieve, 1987), sap flow sensors (Dragoni et al., 2006; Intrigliolo et al., 2009; Trambouze and Voltz, 2001; Yunusa et al., 1997) and remote sensing (CarrascoBenavides et al., 2012; Consoli et al., 2006; Lopes et al., 2010; Rozenstein et al., 2018; Vanino et al., 2015). Another technique is lysimetry, which is considered the standard technique for measuring ETc (Hatfild 1990, Howell et al., 1995, Prueger 1997). Lysimeters have been used to measure the water consumption of many woody agricultural species such as apple (Girona et al., 2011; Mpelasoka et al., 2001; Ro, 2001), almond (García-Tejero et al., 2015; Heilmeier et al., 2002; Lorite et al., 2012) and olive (Ben-Gal et al., 2010; Deidda et al., 1990). In field-grown grapevines, lysimeters have been used to measure ETc of a range of cultivars under different climate and soil conditions with drainage (Evans et al., 1993; Netzer et al., 2009; Prior and Grieve, 1987) and weighting methods (López-Urrea et al., 2012; Picón et al., 2012; Williams et al., 2003). The objectives of the present research are:
2.2. Lysimeters – structure and maintenance Each of the six lysimeter tanks was 1.2 m in diameter and 1.3 m in height, for a total volume of 1.47 m3. The lysimeters were filled with local soil (terra rossa) packed to the original bulk density while conserving soil layers. In order to avoid edge row effects, the lysimeters tanks were located in the second row of the vineyard (S1, 2). To ensure drainage of water from the lysimeter tank into the receiver tank, the bottom of each lysimeter tank was packed with 30 cm of rock wool. The lysimeters were buried in the ground with their top surfaces aligned with the soil surface. Two 10-m-long drainage pipe lines (50.8 mm in diameter) connected to the base of each lysimeter tank led to a 2.5-mdeep underground tunnel located 7 m outside the vineyard. For more technical details about lysimeter construction see the supplementary information (S1-3). Each lysimeter was irrigated separately with a tailor-made, computer-controlled system (Crystal vision, Kibbutz Samar, Israel). To ensure 'optimum soil water conditions' (Allen et al., 2006) the daily irrigation amount exceeded the vines’ estimated daily water consumption (ETo) by 5–10 %. During 2011–2012, daily irrigation began at 6:00 am and lasted for 4–8 hours depending on the amount of water that was applied. During 2013–2017, irrigation was set on an hourly basis, i.e. 24 irrigations pulses per day. The drip line of each lysimeter was connected to a separate, high-precision flowmeter (RS Pro Turbine Flow Meter, RS Components Ltd., Birchington Road, Corby, Northants, NN17 9RS, UK) and equipped with four CNL (compensated non-leakage) 1 L h−1 drip emitters spaced 30 cm apart (Netafim, Israel). The drainage water from each lysimeter was collected separately in a receiver tank (tailor-made 30-L round container) placed on a scale (load cell Model 1042, Vishay, Measurements Group, Rayleigh, NC, USA) and its weight was recorded every 15 min (S3). The drainage tank was automatically emptied each day between 11:46 and 11:59 pm. The data were recorded on the system data logger and downloaded on a daily basis via cellular communication. The drainage scales and the high-precision flowmeters were calibrated manually twice a week.
1) To determine the seasonal curves of ETc and Kc of mature Vitis vinfera cv. Cabernet Sauvignon vines trained to a vertical shoot positioning (VSP) training system grown in a semi-arid region. 2) To establish the relationship between LAI and Kc. This relationship forms the basis for developing a comprehensive irrigation model considering climate conditions, canopy area and grapevine specific features.
2.3. Crop and reference evapotranspiration and crop coefficient calculations The daily vine water consumption - ETc (L day−1), was calculated by subtracting the amount of water collected as drainage in the receiver tank (over a 24 h period) from the amount of irrigation applied to the lysimeter tank during the same time period. Daily crop evapotranspiration - ETc (mm day−1) was calculated by multiplying the daily vine water consumption by 0.222 (2222 vines ha−1 divided by 10,000 m2). Daily reference evapotranspiration (ETo) was calculated
2. Materials and methods 2.1. Experiment design and vineyard structure The study was carried out during six successive years from 2012 to 87
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
Fig. 1. (a – d) Seasonal curves of measured evapotranspiration (ETc) and calculated evapotranspiration (ETo). (e – h) Seasonal curves of crop coefficient (Kc).Phenological stages (I, II, III) are marked by dashed lines. Each point is the mean of six lysimeters. Vertical bar denotes one standard error. Measured from 2013 to 2016 in a 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard, Kida Israel.
Netzer et al., 2009; Williams et al., 2003). The meteorological data used for calculating ETo and GDD were obtained from a meteorological station located 50 m east of the lysimeter installation. The meteorological station was equipped with a data logger (CR1000, Campbell science, Logan, UT, USA), combined temperature and humidity sensor at 2 m height (HMP155, Vaisala, Helsinki, Finland), wind speed and
according to the Penman-Monteith equation. The daily crop coefficient (Kc) was calculated by dividing the daily crop evapotranspiration ETc (mm day−1) by the daily reference evapotranspiration ETo (mm day−1) according to FAO paper no. 56 (Allen et al., 2006, 1998). Growing degree days (GDD) were calculated using the base temperature of 10 °C as used previously for grapevines by several authors (Evans et al., 1993; 88
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
Subsequently, the covers were transferred to the uncovered lysimeter tanks and the next day another four days of soil evaporation were measured. Soil evaporation was measured by subtracting the average water consumption of the three covered lysimeters from the average water consumption of the three uncovered lysimeters.
Table 1 Seasonal ETc, ETo and irrigation amounts. 'Cabernet sauvignon', 'Kida' vineyard.2012–2017. Irrigation field (mm season-1)
Irrigation lysimeters(mm season-1)
ETo(mm season-1)
ETc(mm season-1)
Year
——— 64 53 39 25 33 43
——— 1571 1326 1206 1403 1270 1355
1205 1321 1203 1197 1322 1173 1237
780 746 698 671 668 724 715
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Avarage
2.8. Yield, must composition and pruning mass Each of the six lysimeter-grown vines and the six adjacent fieldgrown vines were harvested separately. Total yield was weighed and the number of bunches per vine was recorded. One hundred berries from lysimeter-grown vines and from field-grown vines were randomly sampled, and berry mass was determined. After weighing the berries, they were crushed, and the pH and sugar content (TSS) of the must was measured (after filtration). During the winter period, the pruning mass of each of the lysimeter-grown and field-grown vines was recorded separately.
direction sensor at 10 m height (05103LM, Young, Traverse City, MI, USA), solar radiation sensor at 2 m height (CM11, Kipp & zonen, Delft, The Netherlands) and automatic rainfall gauge (00.15189.002 000, Lambrecht, Gottingen, Germany).
3. Results 2.4. Leaf Area Index measurements
3.1. Crop and reference evapotranspiration and crop coefficient
Leaf Area Index (LAI) of the six lysimeter-grown vines and of the six adjacent field-grown vines was measured weekly during each growing season using a canopy analysis system (SunScan model SS1-R3-BF3; Delta-T Devices, Cambridge, UK). This system, which uses a line quantum sensor array of 64 sensors, sensitive to photosynthetic active radiation (PAR), was operated using the standard protocol recommended by the manufacturer, and all measurements were conducted while the zenith angle was below 30°. Each sample comprised 16 equally-spaced observations (10 cm apart), starting from the center of the row to half the distance between adjacent rows, with the sensor array positioned parallel to the rows. The LAI values obtained by this method were compared with measurements obtained after destructive defoliation of leaves from 39 vines (3 cultivars from 6 sites), using an area meter (model 3100; Li-Cor, Lincoln, Nebraska). The two measurement methods were found to be highly correlated with a linear relationship (S4, R2 = 0.922; P < 0.001). For more information about LAI measurements see Netzer et al., (2009).
The seasonal course of crop and reference evapotranspiration was similar across the growing seasons (Fig. 1a-d). Measured crop evapotranspiration, ETc, was at its minimum at the beginning of the growing season (DOY 90–110, budbreak) with values of 1.0–1.5 mm day−1. From budbreak onwards, a constant increase in ETc was recorded until the middle of stage II (DOY 190–210), reaching values of 4–6 mm day−1. Subsequently, a constant decline in ETc was recorded, reaching values of 3–4 mm day−1 at harvest and 1.5–2 mm day−1 in early fall (DOY 280–300, Fig. 1a-d). The seasonal sum of ETc was similar across the trial years (668–780 mm season−1), averaging 715 mm season−1 (Table 1). The seasonal trend of the calculated reference evapotranspiration (ETo) was similar to that of ETc, but of smaller magnitude (higher values during budbreak and fall). ETo values at budbreak were 3–4 mm day−1, rising to a peak of 6–8 mm day−1 during the middle of stage II (DOY 190–210) and then decreasing to 3.5 - 4.5 mm day-1 during early fall (DOY 280–300, Fig. 1a-d). The seasonal sum of ETo was steady over the trial years (1173–1321 mm season−1), averaging 1237 mm season−1 (Table 1). Except for a few occasions (mainly at 2013 DOY 215, Fig. 1a), the calculated ETo values were higher than the measured ETc values. The seasonal irrigation amounts applied to lysimeter vines exceeded the sum of ETo by 9.5%, on average, according to the irrigation plan. Field vines were irrigated with 43 mm season−1 (Table 1) from DOY 180 to DOY 200, an RDI irrigation strategy similar to that being applied to the local commercial vineyards. The seasonal pattern of Kc was similar across the growing seasons (Fig. 1e-h). Kc was minimal at the beginning of the growing season (DOY 90–110), in the range 0.15 - 0.25, then increased gradually, reaching maximum values of 0.6 - 0.8 at the middle of stage II (DOY 190–210). Subsequently, a constant decline in Kc was recorded, with values of 0.35 - 0.55 in early fall (DOY 280–300, Fig. 1e-h). The effect of hedging and catch wire lifting are reflected in the sharp decline in Kc (Fig. 1e DOY 215, Fig. 1g DOY 240, Fig. 1h DOY 145). A strong seconddegree polynomial relationship was found between Kc and DOY (R2 = 0.92, Fig. 2a) between crop coefficient and GDD (R2 = 0.9, Fig. 2b).
2.5. Stem water potential measurements Midday stem water potential (Ψs) of the six lysimeter-grown vines and the six adjacent field-grown vines was measured weekly at solar noon (from 12:00 to 14:30). The measurements were conducted using a pressure chamber (model Arimad 3000, MRC, Hulon, Israel) according to the procedures of Boyer (1995). One sunlit, mature, fully-expanded leaf from each vine was double bagged 2 h prior to measurement with plastic bags covered with aluminum foil. The time elapsing between leaf excision and chamber pressurization was less than 15 s. In the fieldgrown vines, measurements were conducted at the same time, one day before irrigation (irrigation was applied once a week). 2.6. Phenological stages The growing season was divided into three phenological stages as defined by Kennedy (2002): Stage I - from full bloom to bunch closure, stage II - from bunch closure to veraison (color change to red) and stage III - from veraison to harvest.
3.2. Grapevine phenology, vegetative growth and water status
2.7. Soil evaporation measurements
The phenological stages occurred at similar dates across the growing seasons (Fig. 3a-h). Full bloom was recorded at DOY 125–135, bunch closure at DOY 160–175, veraison at DOY 210–215 and harvest at DOY 245 - 260. No pronounced differences were recorded between the phenological development of lysimeter vines and that of adjacent field vines.
On two different occasions during each growing season, the soil surface of three lysimeter tanks was covered with white plastic sheets, while the soil surface of the other three lysimeter tanks remained uncovered. Soil evaporation in all lysimeters was measured for four days. 89
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
(Fig. 3e–h). 3.3. Yield and must composition The yield of the lysimeter vines (7.5 kg vine−1) was 50% higher compared to that of field vines (Table 2) nevertheless it was still in the range of yields reported by local commercial vineyards (5–7.8 kg vine−1). Bunch number of lysimeter vines was 8% higher compared to that of field vines, both of them representative of vines in commercial vineyards in the region. Similarly, the berry mass of lysimeter vines was 40% higher than that of field vines (Table 2), while the number of berries per bunch was similar in lysimeter and field vines. While the TSS of field vines was adequate for production of dry red wine (24.4° Brix), the TSS of lysimeter vines was lower (20.1° Brix). Acid level was similar in both lysimeter and field vines, and was adequate for dry red wine production (Table 2). 3.4. Leaf area index and crop coefficient relationship The multi-seasonal linear correlation between LAI and Kc was strong and significant (Fig. 4, R2 = 0.66, P < 0.0001). Since, as described above, there is a rapid increase in leaf area followed by stabilization, most of the LAI values used in the correlation are in the range of 0.8 1.3 m2 m−2. 3.5. Evaporation and transpiration relationship Evaporation remained relatively stable during the growing season (1.5–3.7 L day−1), and the average percent evaporation from total water consumption was 18% (Table 3). At the beginning and end of the growing season (April, October), when evapotranspiration values were low (7.0–7.5 L day−1), the percent evaporation from total water consumption was 21–38% (Table 3), while during the main growing period (May to September), when ET was high (9.9–25.5 L day−1), the percent evaporation from total evapotranspiration was 9–15% (Table 3). 4. Discussion Fig. 2. (a) Development of crop coefficient (Kc) as a function of day of year. (b) Development of crop coefficient (Kc) as a function of growing degree days.Phenological stages (I, II, III) are marked by dashed lines. Each point is the mean of six lysimeters. Vertical bar denotes one standard error. Measured from 2012 to 2017 in a 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard, Kida Israel.
This experiment was intentionally conducted in a commercial vineyard and avoiding construction of lysimeters in the first border row, even though considerable technical difficulties were expected. This approach reflected our desire to measure water consumption of wine grapevines in a way that most accurately represents water consumption of "real" vines growing in "real" commercial vineyard conditions. Similarly, canopy area and water status were always compared between lysimeter vines and field vines.
The seasonal course of LAI of lysimeter and field vines was similar along the growing seasons (Fig. 3a-d). A steep increase in LAI was recorded from budbreak until the middle of stage I (DOY 150–165), at which LAI reached a maximum of 0.9 - 1.2 m2 m−2 (exceptionally high values of 1.7 m2 m−2 were measured during 2016). Subsequently, LAI stabilized in both lysimeter and field vines (Fig. 3a-d). The average LAI of lysimeter vines across all trial years exceeded that of field vines by 14%. The canopy hedging effect on lysimeters vines is reflected by a sharp decline in LAI values at 2013 DOY 205–220 (Fig. 3a) and at 2015 DOY 195 (Fig. 3c). The lifting of catch wires caused a 42% reduction in measured LAI in lysimeter vines and a 35% reduction in field vines (DOY 150, Fig. 3d). The average pruning mass of field vines was 52% lower than that of lysimeter vines (Table 2). Stem water potential (Ψs) of lysimeter vines remained steady along the growing season, in the range -0.35 MPa to-0.6 MPa (Fig. 3e-h). On two exceptional occasions (Fig. 3e DOY 128, Fig. 3f DOY 142) Ψs of lysimeter vines declined to -0.7 MPa. The Ψs of the field vines was high (-0.6 MPa to-0.85 MPa) during spring and then consistently decreased until harvest, reaching -1.4 MPa to-1.6 MPa (Fig. 3e-h). During 2013 and 2015, Ψs of field vines resembled that of lysimeter vines until the end of stage I (DOY 170), while in 2014 and 2016 it was -0.2 MPa lower, on average, from the beginning of the growing season
4.1. Crop and reference evapotranspiration and crop coefficient The ETc of 715 mm season−1 recorded in this study was measured in a region with total ETo of 1237 mm season−1, thus the seasonal ETc/ ETo ratio is 0.58. This level of water consumption is in the range reported in the literature for wine grapevines. López-Urrea et al. (2012) reported water consumption (using weighting lysimeters) of 477 mm season−1 for "Tempranillo" grapevines grown under climatic conditions of ETo of 895 mm season−1 giving an ETc/ETo ratio of 0.53. For the same grape cultivar, Picón-Toro et al. (2012) obtained (using weighting lysimeters) water consumption of 834 mm season−1 with ETo of 1159 mm season−1 giving an ETc/ETo ratio of 0.72. It is important to note that both López-Urrea et al. (2012) and Picón-Toro et al. (2012) measured minimal evaporation of dry soil, while in the current study the soil was always completely wet (accepted procedure for drainage lysimeters irrigated at 1-hour intervals). For comparison, Evans et al. (1993) reported seasonal water consumption (using drainage lysimeters) of 387, 431, 432 mm season−1 for "White Riesling", "Chenin Blanc" and "Cabernet Sauvignon". The cumulative seasonal ETo was 90
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
Fig. 3. (a – d) Seasonal curves of canopy development (LAI) in lysimeter vines (closed circles) and field vines (open circles). (e – f) Seasonal curves of midday stem water potential (Ψs) in lysimeter vines (closed circles) and field vines (open circles). Phenological stages (I, II, III) are marked by dashed lines. Each point is the mean of six vines. Vertical bar denotes one standard error. Measured from 2013 to 2016 in a 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard, Kida Israel.
908 mm season−1, giving ETc/ETo ratios of 0.43, 0.47 and 0.48, respectively. Based primarily on the results of gravimetric soil sampling, Doorenbos and Pruitt (1977) reported that vineyard ETc may vary from 650 to 1000 mm year−1. The maximal Kc values below 1 obtained in this study are reasonable for VSP-trained wine grapevines with limited canopy area. Our
maximal Kc values of 0.8 - 0.9 are in good agreement with other reported Kc values for wine grapevine cultivars. Picón-Toro et al. (2012) reported maximal Kcb (dry soil) values around 1 for "Tempranillo" (using weighting lysimeters). Intrigliolo et al. (2009) obtained maximal Kcb values of 0.55 for field grown "Riesling" (using a canopy chamber). Dragoni et al. (2006) calculated maximal Kcb values of 1–1.2 for field 91
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
Table 2 Yield components and pruning mass of lysimetres and field vines, 'Cabernet sauvignon', 'Kida' vineyard, 2013 - 2017. pH
TSS(oBrix)
Berries(number bunch-1)
Berry mass(g)
Pruning mass(kg vine-1)
Bunch(number vine-1)
Yield(kg vine-1)
3.30 ± 0.04 3.35 ± 0.05
20.1 ± 0.8 24.4 ± 0.4
82.7 ± 7.5 86.4 ± 2.4
1.67 ± 0.08 1.22 ± 0.13
2.1 ± 0.05 1.0 ± 0.23
72.7 ± 10.1 64.1 ± 7.7
7.5 ± 1.9 5.0 ± 1.5
Values represent means (n = 30, 6 vines * 5 years), except for yield and bunch number that has missing data in 2015.
vines. The maximal LAI values measured in this study (0.9 to 1.7 m2 m−2) are in the range of LAI values of field-grown vines trained on a VSP trellis system reported by others, who used different measuring methods. Intrigliolo and Castel (2010) reported LAI of 0.6 to 1.6 m2 m−2 in "Tempranillo" vines. Romero et al. (2010) measured maximal LAI of 2.2 m2 m−2 in "Monastrell" vines. Edwards and Clingeleffer (2013) reported LAI in the range 1.7 to 2.9 m2 m−2 in "Cabernet Sauvignon" vines. Johnson et al. (2003) obtained LAI in the range 0.4 - 2.8 m2 m−2 in four different cultivars ("Chardonnay", "Cabernet Sauvignon", "Cabernet Franc" and "Sangiovese"). Buesa et al. (2017) measured LAI in the range 0.9 to 2.1 m2 m−2 in "Muscat of Alexandria". Intrigliolo et al. (2009) reported maximal LAI of 1.5 m2 m−2 in "Riesling". Picón-Toro et al. (2012) reported LAI values above 4 m2 m−2 in "Tempranillo" VSP-trained vines. These authors stated that the development of their vineyard is greater than in most winemaking areas, but their values are almost double those mentioned above and seem to be a bit overestimated. The range of Ψs values measured in this study in the lysimeter vines (-0.3 to -0.65 MPa), are typical for non-stressed grapevines. Picón-Toro et al. (2012) reported Ψs of -0.35 to -0.8 MPa in non-stressed "Tempranillo" vines. Patakas et al. (2005) obtained Ψs of -0.4 to -0.6 MPa in non-stressed "Malagouzia" vines. Buesa et al. (2017) measured Ψs of -0.4 to -0.8 MPa in non-stressed "Muscat of Alexandria" vines. PicónToro et al. (2012) calculated that in grapevines, evapotranspiration is maximal down to Ψs of -0.5 to -0.6 MPa, and then begins to decrease. Our lysimeter vines maintained Ψs of -0.6 MPa and higher throughout all growing seasons, meaning that their evapotranspiration was kept maximal as required by FAO paper 56 for ETc calculation (Allen et al., 1998). The seasonal curve of declining Ψs measured in this study in the field-grown vines is typical for deficit-irrigated vineyards located in semi-arid regions (Intrigliolo and Castel, 2010; Munitz et al., 2016; Romero et al., 2010). The similar Ψs of field-grown vines and lysimeter vines during the spring period demonstrates that lysimeter vines represent field-grown vines during high water availability periods.
Fig. 4. Relationship between leaf area index (LAI) and crop coefficient (Kc). Each point is the mean LAI of six vines, and the mean Kc of weekly water consumption of six lysimeters. Vertical and horizontal bars denote one standard error. Measured from 2012 to 2017 in a 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard, Kida Israel.
Table 3 Evapotranspiration, transpiration and calculated evaporation. 'Cabernet sauvignon', 'Kida' vineyard. 2012–2017. E/ ET (%)
Evaporation L day-1))
Transpirationsoil surface coverd (L day-1)
Evapotranspirationsoil surface uncoverd (L day-1)
21 13 15 9 12 38
1.46 ± 0.21 1.27 ± 0.18 3.72 ± 0.59 2.40 ± 1.00 1.87 ± 0.50 2.88 ± 0.39
5.55 ± 0.55 8.68 ± 0.86 21.81 ± 0.69 22.17 ± 1.49 13.31 ± 0.77 4.67 ± 0.41
7.01 ± 0.56 9.95 ± 0.95 25.52 ± 0.83 24.58 ± 0.79 15.12 ± 0.46 7.55 ± 0.68
Month
Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct
4.3. Leaf area index and crop coefficient relationship grown Vitis labruscana "Concord" vines, but their canopy was very wide (LAI = 2.5 m2 m−2). Carrasco-Benavides et al. (2012) calculated (using eddy correlation) maximal Kc values of 0.7 for field-grown "Merlot" vines. Allen and Pereira (2009) calculated maximal Kc values of 0.7 0.75 for wine grapes (using a stress factor of 0.7). Higher values of Kc (above 1) have been reported for table grapes with a much wider canopy (LAI = 5 m2 m−2, Netzer et al., 2009). In "Thompson seedless", Williams et al. (2003) found maximal Kc above 1, and in "Superior Seedless", Netzer et al., (2009) and Wang et al. (2018) reported maximal Kc of 1.2 - 1.3.
The linear correlation between LAI and Kc reported in this study has a steeper slope (higher Kc for similar LAI) than that of relationships reported for table grapes (Netzer et al., 2009; Williams and Ayars, 2005). This is because the VSP trellis systems used for wine grapes receive much greater sun exposure compared to the open gable / overhead trellis systems used for table grapes. As mentioned above, Kc is affected by canopy shape and trellising architecture (Williams and Ayars, 2005; Williams and Fidelibus, 2016). We converted the canopy cover percentage data of López-Urrea et al. (2012) to LAI, using correlations from Williams and Ayars (2005) and converted their basal crop coefficient (Kcb, only transpiration) to crop coefficient (Kc, transpiration + evaporation, using their own data). The resulting LAI / Kc relationship resembles our correlation, but with a decline in the slope. The slope of the LAI / Kcb relationship obtained for wine grapes by Picón-Toro et al. (2012) is quite similar to slopes reported previously for table grapes (Netzer et al., 2009; Williams and Ayars, 2005). Even after adding 18% to Kcb in order to transform it to Kc (18% of average evaporation from total evapotranspiration according to our data in Table 3.) the slope of the Picón-Toro et al. (2012) LAI / Kc relationship is still quite similar to that of table grapes. This shift can be caused by
4.2. Leaf area index and water potential Grapevine canopy development, occurring mainly from bud break till the end of stage I (bunch closure), as observed in this study, is consistent with our former results (Munitz et al., 2016), and has also been reported by others (Ben-Asher et al., 2006; Edwards and Clingeleffer, 2013; Peacock et al., 1987; Picón-Toro et al., 2012; Romero et al., 2010). Similar LAI values of lysimeter and field vines indicate that the lysimeter vines are well representative of field-grown 92
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
overestimation of LAI, as mentioned above.
Crop Water Requirments. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper, ROME. Ben-Asher, J., Tsuyuki, I., Bravdo, B.-A., Sagih, M., 2006. Irrigation of grapevines with saline water I. Leaf area index, stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis. Agric. Water Manag. 83, 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2006.01. 002. Ben-Gal, A., Kool, D., Agam, N., van Halsema, G.E., Yermiyahu, U., Yafe, A., Presnov, E., Erel, R., Majdop, A., Zipori, I., Segal, E., Rüger, S., Zimmermann, U., Cohen, Y., Alchanatis, V., Dag, A., 2010. Whole-tree water balance and indicators for short-term drought stress in non-bearing “Barnea” olives. Agric. Water Manag. 98, 124–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.08.008. Boyer, J., 1995. Water Relations of Plants and Soils. Acdemic Press, San Diego, CA, USA. Bravdo, B., Hepner, Y., Loinger, C., Cohen, S., Tabacman, H., 1985. Effect of irrigation and crop level on growth, yield and wine quality of Cabernet Sauvignon. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 36, 132–139. Buesa, I., Pérez, D., Castel, J., Intrigliolo, D., Castel, J., 2017. Effect of deficit irrigation on vine performance and grape composition of Vitis vinifera L. Cv. Muscat of Alexandria. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 23, 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajgw.12280. Bureau, S.M., Baumes, R.L., Razungles, A.J., 2000. Effects of vine or bunch shading on the glycosylated flavor precursors in grapes of Vitis vinifera L. Cv. Syrah. J. Agric. Food Chem. 48, 1290–1297. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf990507x. Carrasco-Benavides, M., Ortega-Farías, S., Lagos, L.O., Kleissl, J., Morales, L., PobleteEcheverría, C., Allen, R.G., 2012. Crop coefficients and actual evapotranspiration of a drip-irrigated Merlot vineyard using multispectral satellite images. Irrig. Sci. 30, 485–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-012-0379-4. Chaves, M., Zarrouk, O., Francisco, R., Costa, J., Santos, T., Regalado, A., Rodrigues, M., Lopes, C., 2010. Grapevine under deficit irrigation: hints from physiological and molecular data. Ann. Bot. 105, 661–676. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcq030. Chorti, E., Guidoni, S., Ferrandino, A., Novello, V., 2010. Effect of different cluster sunlight exposure levels on ripening and anthocyanin accumulation in Nebbiolo grapes. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 61, 23–30. Consoli, S., D’Urso, G., Toscano, A., 2006. Remote sensing to estimate ET-fluxes and the performance of an irrigation district in southern Italy. Agric. Water Manag. 81, 295–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2005.04.008. Deidda, P., Dettori, S., Filigheddu, M., Virdis, F., Pala, M., 1990. Lysimetric analysis of water requirements for young table-olive trees. Acta Hortic. 286, 259–261. Di, H., Cameron, K., 2002. Nitrate leaching in temperate agroecosystems: sources, factors and mitigating strategies. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosystems 64, 237–256. https://doi.org/ 10.1023/A:1021471531188. Doorenbos, J., Pruitt, W., 1977. Guidelines for predicting crop water requirements. FAO Irrig. Drain. Pap. 24, 144. Dragoni, D., Lakso, A.N., Piccioni, R.M., Tarara, J.M., 2006. Transpiration of grapevines in the humid northeastern United States. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 57, 460–467. Edwards, E.J., Clingeleffer, P.R., 2013. Interseasonal effects of regulated deficit irrigation on growth, yield, water use, berry composition and wine attributes of Cabernet Sauvignon grapevines. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 19, 261–276. https://doi.org/10. 1111/ajgw.12027. Esteban, M.A., Villanueva, M.J., Lissarrague, J.R., 2001. Effect of irrigation on changes in the anthocyanin composition of the skin of cv Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L) grape berries during ripening. J. Sci. Food Agric. 81, 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 1097-0010(200103)81:4<409::AID-JSFA830>3.0.CO;2-H. Evans, R.G., Spayd, S.E., Wample, R.L., Kroeger, M.W., Mahan, M.O., 1993. Water use of Vitis vinifera grapes in Washington*. Agric. Water Manag. 23, 109–124. https://doi. org/10.1016/0378-3774(93)90035-9. Fereres, E., Evans, R.G., 2006. Irrigation of fruit trees and vines: an introduction. Irrig. Sci. 24, 55–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-005-0019-3. Gao, Y., Cahoon, G.A., 1994. Cluster shading effects on fruit quality, fruit skin color, and anthocyanin content and composition in Reliance (Vitis hybrid). Vitis 33, 205–209. García-Tejero, I.F., Hernandez, A., Rodriguez, V., Ponce, J., Ramos, V., Muriel, J., DuranZuazo, V.H., 2015. Estimating almond crop coefficients and physiological response to water stress in semiarid environments (SW Spain). J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 17, 1255–1266. Girona, J., Marsal, J., Mata, M., Del Campo, J., Basile, B., 2009. Phenological sensitivity of berry growth and composition of Tempranillo grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.) to water stress. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 15, 268–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17550238.2009.00059.x. Girona, J., del Campo, J., Mata, M., Lopez, G., Marsal, J., 2011. A comparative study of apple and pear tree water consumption measured with two weighing lysimeters. Irrig. Sci. 29, 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-010-0217-5. Grimes, D.W., Williams, L.E., 1990. Irrigation effects on plant water relations and productivity of Thompson seedless grapevines. Crop Sci. 30, 255–260. https://doi.org/ 10.2135/cropsci1990.0011183X003000020003x. Heilmeier, H., Wartinger, A., Erhard, M., Zimmermann, R., Horn, R., Schulze, E.D., 2002. Soil drought increases leaf and whole-plant water use of Prunus dulcis grown in the Negev Desert. Oecologia 130, 329–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420100808. Intrigliolo, D.S., Castel, J.R., 2010. Response of grapevine cv. “Tempranillo” to timing and amount of irrigation: water relations, vine growth, yield and berry and wine composition. Irrig. Sci. 28, 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-009-0164-1. Intrigliolo, D.S., Lakso, A.N., Piccioni, R.M., 2009. Grapevine cv. ‘riesling’ water use in the northeastern United States. Irrig. Sci. 27, 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271008-0140-1. Jagtap, S., Jones, J., 1989. Stability of crop coefficients under different climate and irrigation Management Practices *. Irrig. Sci. 10, 231–244. Johnson, L., Roczen, D., Youkhana, S., Nemani, R., Bosch, D., 2003. Mapping vineyard leaf area with multispectral satellite imagery. Comput. Electron. Agric. 38, 33–44. Keller, M., 2005. Deficit irrigation and vine mineral nutrition. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 56, 267–283.
4.4. Evaporation and transpiration relationship The average percent evaporation from total evapotranspiration measured in this study was 18%. This is in good agreement with evaporation values reported by others in vineyards. In "Tempranillo" vines, Montoro et al. (2016) calculated 26–31% evaporation (using FAO 56 methodology) from total evapotranspiration. In "Cabernet Sauvignon" vines, Kool et al. (2014) reported 8–17% evaporation (using eddy correlation) of total evapotranspiration. In table grapes with a much wider canopy that shades the soil, lower evaporation/evapotranspiration ratios were found. In "Thompson seedless", 13% was reported (Williams and Fidelibus, 2016), and in "Superior Seedless", 7% (Netzer et al., 2009). It is important to note that our evaporation results overestimate vineyard evaporation since our lysimeter soil was always wet; nevertheless, our evaporation results underestimate vineyard evaporation since our lysimeter soil surface is only 1.1 m2 while the soil surface per vine in the vineyard is 4.5 m2. 5. Conclusions The water potential and all vegetative parameters measured in this study clearly show that our lysimeter vines demonstrate similar physiological performance to that of field-grown vines under high water availability conditions, and can serve as a reference model vines for field-grown grapevine irrigation. The robust multiyear relationship between LAI and Kc proves that measuring the canopy area of wine grapevines is a reliable approach for estimating their Kc. The LAI to Kc relationship established in this study can be used as a basis for developing a comprehensive irrigation model for wine grapevines that integrates both climatic conditions and canopy area. Measuring canopy area in a vineyard (and converting it to Kc) combined with meteorological data from an adjacent weather station (ETo) will enable calculation of the ETc of the vineyard using the equation: ETc = ETo* Kc. Applying this irrigation model to wine grapevines, in which a certain drought stress is desirable, requires the incorporation of a stress factor (Ks) as explained by Munitz et al. (2016). Acknowledgments This study was sponsored by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Israel and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Israel and the Israeli Wine Grape Council. The authors thank to the dedicated growers : Yoav David, Itamar Weis, Yedidia Spitz and Shlomi Choen. We particularly thank Yechezkel Harroch, Bentzi Green, Yossi Shteren, Alon Katz, Ben hazut, David Kimchi, Gilad gersman, Alon chores, Yedidia sweid, Daniel Mintz and Yair hayat for assisting in the field measurements and to Ziv Charit from Netafim for the help with the vineyard irrigation system. We thank the team of Teperberg Winery, Udi Gliksman, Shiki Rauchberger and Olivier Fratty for their collaboration. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary material related to this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2019.03.051. References Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., 2009. Estimating crop coefficients from fraction of ground cover and height. Irrig. Sci. 28, 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-009-0182-z. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration. Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. FAO irrigation and drainage paper no. 56, FAO irrigation and drainage paper no. 56, ROME. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja. 2010.12.001. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L., Raes, D., 2006. Crop Evapotranspiration. Guidlines for Computing
93
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
south-western Spain. Irrig. Sci. 30, 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-0120351-3. Prior, L.D., Grieve, A.M., 1987. Water use and irrigation requirements of grapevine. Sixth Australian Wine Industry Technical Conference. pp. 165–168. Ro, H.M., 2001. Water use of young “Fuji” apple trees at three soil moisture regimes in drainage lysimeters. Agric. Water Manag. 50, 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0378-3774(01)00099-3. Romero, P., Fernández-Fernández, J.I., Martinez-Cutillas, A., 2010. Physiological thresholds for efficient regulated deficit-irrigation management in winegrapes grown under semiarid conditions. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 61, 300–312. Romero, P., Gil-Muñoz, R., del Amor, F.M., Valdés, E., Fernández, J.I., Martinez-Cutillas, A., 2013. Regulated Deficit Irrigation based upon optimum water status improves phenolic composition in Monastrell grapes and wines. Agric. Water Manag. 121, 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2013.01.007. Rozenstein, O., Haymann, N., Kaplan, G., Tanny, J., 2018. Estimating cotton water consumption using a time series of Sentinel-2 imagery. Agric. Water Manag. 207, 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.05.017. Trambouze, W., Voltz, M., 2001. Measurement and modelling of the transpiration of a Mediterranean vineyard. Agric. For. Meteorol 107, 153–166. https://doi.org/10. 1016/S0168-1923(00)00226-4. Van Zyl, J., Van Huyssteen, L., 1980. Comparative studies on wine grapes on different trellising systems: I. Consumptive water use South African. J. Enol. Vitic. 1, 7–14. Vanino, S., Pulighe, G., Nino, P., De Michele, C., Bolognesi, S., D’Urso, G., 2015. Estimation of evapotranspiration and crop coefficients of tendone vineyards using multi-sensor remote sensing data in a mediterranean environment. Remote Sens. (Basel) 7, 14708–14730. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs71114708. Wang, S., Zhu, G., Xia, D., Ma, J., Han, T., Ma, T., Zhang, K., Shang, S., 2018. The characteristics of evapotranspiration and crop coefficients of an irrigated vineyard in arid Northwest China. Agric. Water Manag. 212, 388–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.agwat.2018.09.023. Watts, D.G., Hergert, G.W., Nichols, J.T., 1991. Plant and Environment Interactions. Nitrogen Leaching Losses from Irrigated Orchardgrass on Sandy Soils. J. Environ. Qual. 20, 355–362. Williams, L.E., Araujo, F.J., 2002. Correlations among predawn leaf, midday leaf, and midday stem water potential and their correlations with other measures of soil and plant water status in Vitis vinifera. J. Am. Soc. 127, 448–454. Williams, L.E., Ayars, J.E., 2005. Water use of Thompson Seedless grapevines as affected by the application of gibberellic acid (GA3) and trunk girdling - Practices to increase berry size. Agric. For. Meteorol. 129, 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet. 2004.11.007. Williams, L.E., Fidelibus, M.W., 2016. Measured and estimated water use and crop coefficients of grapevines trained to overhead trellis systems in California’s San Joaquin Valley. Irrig. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-016-0513-9. Williams, L.E., Phene, C.J., Grimes, D.W., Trout, T.J., 2003. Water use of mature Thompson Seedless grapevines in California. Irrig. Sci. 22, 11–18. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s00271-003-0067-5. Yunusa, I.A.M., Walker, R.R., Blackmore, D.H., 1997. Characterisation of water use by Sultana grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.) on their own roots or on Ramsey rootstock dripirrigated with water of different salinities. Irrig. Sci. 17, 77–86. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s002710050025. Yunusa, I.A.M., Walker, R.R., Lu, P., 2004. Evapotranspiration components from energy balance, sapflow and microlysimetry techniques for an irrigated vineyard in inland Australia. Agric. For. Meteorol. 127, 93–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet. 2004.07.001.
Keller, M., Smithyman, R., Mills, L., 2008. Interactive effects of deficit irrigation and crop load on Cabernet Sauvignon in an arid climate. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 59, 221–234. https://doi.org/10.5344/ajev.2011.10103. Kool, D., Ben-Gal, A., Agam, N., Šimůnek, J., Heitman, J., Sauer, T., Lazarovitch, N., 2014. Spatial and diurnal below canopy evaporation in a desert vineyard: measurements and modeling. Water Resour. Res. 50, 7035–7049. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 2014WR015409. Lopes, C., Monteiro, A., Rückert, F.E., Gruber, B., Steinberg, B., Schultz, H.R., Braun, P., Schmid, J., Campos, I., Neale, C.M.U., Calera, A., Balbontín, C., González-Piqueras, J., Ferreyra, R., Sellés, G., Ruiz, R., Sellés, Im., 2010. Assessing satellite-based basal crop coefficients for irrigated grapes (Vitis vinifera L.). Agric. Water Manag. 98, 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.07.011. López-Urrea, R., Montoro, a., Mañas, F., López-Fuster, P., Fereres, E., 2012. Evapotranspiration and crop coefficients from lysimeter measurements of mature ‘Tempranillo’ wine grapes. Agric. Water Manag. 112, 13–20. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.agwat.2012.05.009. Lorite, I., Santos, C., Testi, L., Fereres, E., 2012. Design and construction of a large weighing lysimeter in an almond orchard. Span. J. Agric. Res. 10, 238. https://doi. org/10.5424/sjar/2012101-243-11. Medrano, H., Escalona, J.M., Cifre, J., Bota, J., Flexas, J., 2003. A ten-year study on the physiology of two Spanish grapevine cultivars under field conditions: effects of water availability from leaf photosynthesis to grape yield and quality. Funct. Plant Biol. 30, 607–619. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP02110. Montoro, A., Mañas, F., López-Urrea, R., 2016. Transpiration and evaporation of grapevine, two components related to irrigation strategy. Agric. Water Manag. 177, 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.07.005. Morrison, J.C., Noble, A.C., 1990. The effects of leaf and cluster shading on the composition of Cabernet Sauvignon grapes and on fruit and wine sensory properties. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 41, 193–200. Mpelasoka, B., Behboudian, M., Green, S., 2001. Water use, yield and fruit quality of lysimeter-grown apple trees: responses to deficit irrigation and to crop load. Irrig. Sci. 20, 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002710100041. Munitz, S., Netzer, Y., Schwartz, A., 2016. Sustained and regulated deficit irrigation of field-grown Merlot grapevines. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 23, 87–94. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/ajgw.12241. Netzer, Y., Yao, C., Shenker, M., Bravdo, B.-A., Schwartz, A., 2009. Water use and the development of seasonal crop coefficients for Superior Seedless grapevines trained to an open-gable trellis system. Irrig. Sci. 27, 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00271-008-0124-1. Netzer, Y., Shenker, M., Schwartz, A., 2014. Effects of irrigation using treated wastewater on table grape vineyards: dynamics of sodium accumulation in soil and plant. Irrig. Sci. 32, 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-014-0430-8. Oliver, H., Sene, K., 1992. Energy and water balances of developing vines. Agric. For. Meteorol. 61, 167–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1923(92)90048-9. Patakas, A., Noitsakis, B., Chouzouri, A., 2005. Optimization of irrigation water use in grapevines using the relationship between transpiration and plant water status. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 106, 253–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2004.10.013. Peacock, W., Christensen, L., Andris, H., 1987. Development of a drip irrigation schedule for average canopy vineyards in the San Joaquin valley. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 38, 113–119. Picón, J., Uriarte, D., Mancha, L.A., Blanco, J., Prieto, M.H., 2012. Seasonal crop coefficients and relationships with measures of canopy development for “Tempranillo” grapevines in south-western Spain. Acta Hortic. 235–242. Picón-Toro, J., González-Dugo, V., Uriarte, D., Mancha, L., Testi, L., 2012. Effects of canopy size and water stress over the crop coefficient of a “Tempranillo” vineyard in
94
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Agricultural Water Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat
Water consumption, crop coefficient and leaf area relations of a Vitis vinifera cv. 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard Sarel Munitzb,c, Amnon Schwartzc, Yishai Netzera,b,
T
⁎
a
Department of Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology and Materials, Ariel University, Ariel 40700, Israel The Eastern Regional Research and Development Center, Ariel 40700, Israel c R.H. Smith Institute of Plant Science and Genetics in Agriculture, Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Environment, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot 76100, Israel b
A R T I C LE I N FO
A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Crop coefficient Drainage lysimeters Evapotranspiration Leaf area index Vitis vinifera Water consumption
Most cultivated vineyards worldwide are located in semi-arid and arid regions with a limited water supply. Skilled vineyard water management is considered the main tool for controlling vegetative growth and grape quality and for ensuring vineyard sustainability. Imposing an appropriate drought stress at a suitable phenological stage can improve wine quality with almost no yield reduction. A comprehensive irrigation model enabling precise vineyard irrigation should be based on changes in vine water consumption as a function of climate conditions and canopy area. In 2011, six drainage lysimeters were constructed within a commercial 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard located in the central mountains of Israel. Data were collected during six successive years from 2012 – 2017. The daily vine water consumption, ETc (L day−1), was calculated by subtracting the amount of collected drainage (over a 24 h period) from the amount of applied irrigation during the same time period. Seasonal water consumption (ETc) was 715 mm season−1 on average, while seasonal calculated reference evapotranspiration (ETo) was 1237 mm season−1 on average. Maximal crop coefficient (Kc) was 0.8 – 0.9, meaning that actual water consumption was lower than the calculated reference evapotranspiration. Maximal leaf area index (LAI) was 0.9 to 1.7 m2 m-2. The multi-seasonal linear correlation between LAI and Kc was strongly positive and significant. The robust multiyear relationship between LAI & Kc proves that measuring canopy area of wine grapevines is a reliable approach for estimating their Kc. The LAI to Kc relationship that we have established can be used as a basis for developing a comprehensive irrigation model for wine grapevines that integrates both climatic conditions and canopy area.
1. Introduction Most cultivated vineyards worldwide are located in semi-arid and arid regions, in which water resources are scarce (Chaves et al. 2007). Precise vineyard water management is essential in those areas to enable sustainable production of grapevines (Fereres and Evans, 2006; Romero et al., 2010). In wine grape cultivation, water has additional importance, since skilled vineyard water management is considered the main tool for controlling vegetative growth and grape quality and for ensuring vineyard sustainability (Bravdo et al., 1985; Chaves et al., 2010; Fereres and Evans, 2006; Keller et al., 2008; Munitz et al., 2016; Romero et al., 2010). Imposing an appropriate drought stress at a suitable phenological stage can improve wine quality with almost no yield reduction (Girona et al., 2009; Intrigliolo and Castel, 2010; Munitz
⁎
et al., 2016; Romero et al., 2013; Williams and Araujo, 2002). Conversely, imposing severe drought stress at inappropriate phenological stages can cause significant yield loss and even a decrease in quality in extreme cases (Bravdo et al., 1985; Chaves et al., 2010; Esteban et al., 2001; Grimes and Williams, 1990; Medrano et al., 2003; Munitz et al., 2016). Continuous severe drought stress will dramatically reduce vegetative growth and shorten the lifespan of the vineyard. A non-stress irrigation strategy is also problematic, since excessive irrigation is costly and may cause vigorous vegetative growth that leads to shading of clusters and reduced quality (Bureau et al., 2000; Chorti et al., 2010; Gao and Cahoon, 1994; Morrison and Noble, 1990). In addition, overirrigating may increase the need for canopy management practices and also lead to percolation of water below the root zone, leaching nitrates and other chemicals into groundwater reservoirs (Di and Cameron,
Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (Y. Netzer).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2019.03.051 Received 8 January 2019; Received in revised form 29 March 2019; Accepted 29 March 2019 0378-3774/ © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
2017 at 'Kida' vineyard, located in the central mountain region of Israel (lat 32.2 °N, long. 35.1 °E), 759 m above sea level. The climate at the experimental site is characterized as semi-arid with predominant winter rainfall of 415 mm, warm days (maximum > 30 °C) and relatively cool nights (minimum < 20 °C) during the growing season. The soil is deep, stone-free terra rossa comprising 36.4% sand, 30.6% silt and 33% clay, with bulk density of 1.25 g cm−3. The commercial vineyard was planted during 2007 with Vitis vinifera cv. 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vines grafted onto 110 Richter rootstock. During 2011, similar four-year-old vines were replanted, one in each of the six lysimeter tanks. Vine spacing was 3 m between rows and 1.5 m between vines, i.e. 2222 vines per hectare. Lysimeters were constructed while conserving commercial vineyard spacing. Row orientation was east/west and the vines were trained to a VSP training system with two foliage wires. The vines were designed as a bi-lateral cordon and pruned during the winter to 16 spurs (8 per cordon), each comprising two buds. Except for irrigation, lysimeter vines were treated by following the local commercial vineyard growing practices (pest and weed control, canopy management, pruning).
2002; Keller, 2005; Watts et al., 1991). Moreover, excessive irrigation may lead to fungal infection and cluster rotting. A comprehensive irrigation model enabling precise vineyard irrigation should be based on changes in vine water consumption as a function of climate conditions and canopy area (Allen et al., 2006; Netzer et al., 2009). The term evapotranspiration (ET) refers to the total amount of water that is transpired through the plant canopy and evaporated from the soil surface (Allen et al., 2006). The main factors affecting ET are the canopy area and architecture, evaporative power of the atmosphere (ETo), stomatal conductance and soil type (Allen et al., 2006). The reference evapotranspiration (ETo) of a well-watered 12-cm-high grassy surface that fully covers the ground is calculated using meteorological data from the FAO Penman-Monteith equation (Allen et al., 2006; Doorenbos and Pruitt, 1977). Measuring crop evapotranspiration (ETc) and relating it to reference evapotranspiration (ETo) is the standard procedure for determination of crop coefficient (Kc) used for skilled irrigation management (Allen et al., 2006; Netzer et al., 2009; Williams et al., 2003). Kc is defined as the ratio between the actual crop evapotranspiration (ETc) and reference evapotranspiration (ETo), i.e. Kc = ETc/ETo. Since biotic and abiotic stress on the crop may affect its water consumption (Allen et al., 1998; Netzer et al., 2014), standard Kc needs to be determined on plants that are disease-free, well-fertilized and achieving full production, grown in a large field under optimum soil water conditions (Allen et al., 2006). Kc varies along the growing season as a function of leaf area index (LAI) dynamics, the solar radiation intercepted by the canopy and the phenological stage of the crop (Allen et al., 2006; Doorenbos and Pruitt, 1977; Evans et al., 1993; Jagtap and Jones, 1989; Netzer et al., 2009; Peacock et al., 1987; Williams et al., 2003). The Kc values of grapevines may vary with agricultural practices and trellising architecture (Williams and Ayars, 2005; Williams and Fidelibus, 2016). Kc has two components – Ke, soil evaporation, and Kcb, plant transpiration, i.e. Kc = Ke + Kcb (Allen et al., 2006). Grapevine ETc has been measured and estimated with different techniques such as microclimatological methods (Carrasco-Benavides et al., 2012; Oliver and Sene, 1992; Yunusa et al., 2004), soil moisture (Van Zyl and Van Huyssteen, 1980; Prior and Grieve, 1987), sap flow sensors (Dragoni et al., 2006; Intrigliolo et al., 2009; Trambouze and Voltz, 2001; Yunusa et al., 1997) and remote sensing (CarrascoBenavides et al., 2012; Consoli et al., 2006; Lopes et al., 2010; Rozenstein et al., 2018; Vanino et al., 2015). Another technique is lysimetry, which is considered the standard technique for measuring ETc (Hatfild 1990, Howell et al., 1995, Prueger 1997). Lysimeters have been used to measure the water consumption of many woody agricultural species such as apple (Girona et al., 2011; Mpelasoka et al., 2001; Ro, 2001), almond (García-Tejero et al., 2015; Heilmeier et al., 2002; Lorite et al., 2012) and olive (Ben-Gal et al., 2010; Deidda et al., 1990). In field-grown grapevines, lysimeters have been used to measure ETc of a range of cultivars under different climate and soil conditions with drainage (Evans et al., 1993; Netzer et al., 2009; Prior and Grieve, 1987) and weighting methods (López-Urrea et al., 2012; Picón et al., 2012; Williams et al., 2003). The objectives of the present research are:
2.2. Lysimeters – structure and maintenance Each of the six lysimeter tanks was 1.2 m in diameter and 1.3 m in height, for a total volume of 1.47 m3. The lysimeters were filled with local soil (terra rossa) packed to the original bulk density while conserving soil layers. In order to avoid edge row effects, the lysimeters tanks were located in the second row of the vineyard (S1, 2). To ensure drainage of water from the lysimeter tank into the receiver tank, the bottom of each lysimeter tank was packed with 30 cm of rock wool. The lysimeters were buried in the ground with their top surfaces aligned with the soil surface. Two 10-m-long drainage pipe lines (50.8 mm in diameter) connected to the base of each lysimeter tank led to a 2.5-mdeep underground tunnel located 7 m outside the vineyard. For more technical details about lysimeter construction see the supplementary information (S1-3). Each lysimeter was irrigated separately with a tailor-made, computer-controlled system (Crystal vision, Kibbutz Samar, Israel). To ensure 'optimum soil water conditions' (Allen et al., 2006) the daily irrigation amount exceeded the vines’ estimated daily water consumption (ETo) by 5–10 %. During 2011–2012, daily irrigation began at 6:00 am and lasted for 4–8 hours depending on the amount of water that was applied. During 2013–2017, irrigation was set on an hourly basis, i.e. 24 irrigations pulses per day. The drip line of each lysimeter was connected to a separate, high-precision flowmeter (RS Pro Turbine Flow Meter, RS Components Ltd., Birchington Road, Corby, Northants, NN17 9RS, UK) and equipped with four CNL (compensated non-leakage) 1 L h−1 drip emitters spaced 30 cm apart (Netafim, Israel). The drainage water from each lysimeter was collected separately in a receiver tank (tailor-made 30-L round container) placed on a scale (load cell Model 1042, Vishay, Measurements Group, Rayleigh, NC, USA) and its weight was recorded every 15 min (S3). The drainage tank was automatically emptied each day between 11:46 and 11:59 pm. The data were recorded on the system data logger and downloaded on a daily basis via cellular communication. The drainage scales and the high-precision flowmeters were calibrated manually twice a week.
1) To determine the seasonal curves of ETc and Kc of mature Vitis vinfera cv. Cabernet Sauvignon vines trained to a vertical shoot positioning (VSP) training system grown in a semi-arid region. 2) To establish the relationship between LAI and Kc. This relationship forms the basis for developing a comprehensive irrigation model considering climate conditions, canopy area and grapevine specific features.
2.3. Crop and reference evapotranspiration and crop coefficient calculations The daily vine water consumption - ETc (L day−1), was calculated by subtracting the amount of water collected as drainage in the receiver tank (over a 24 h period) from the amount of irrigation applied to the lysimeter tank during the same time period. Daily crop evapotranspiration - ETc (mm day−1) was calculated by multiplying the daily vine water consumption by 0.222 (2222 vines ha−1 divided by 10,000 m2). Daily reference evapotranspiration (ETo) was calculated
2. Materials and methods 2.1. Experiment design and vineyard structure The study was carried out during six successive years from 2012 to 87
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
Fig. 1. (a – d) Seasonal curves of measured evapotranspiration (ETc) and calculated evapotranspiration (ETo). (e – h) Seasonal curves of crop coefficient (Kc).Phenological stages (I, II, III) are marked by dashed lines. Each point is the mean of six lysimeters. Vertical bar denotes one standard error. Measured from 2013 to 2016 in a 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard, Kida Israel.
Netzer et al., 2009; Williams et al., 2003). The meteorological data used for calculating ETo and GDD were obtained from a meteorological station located 50 m east of the lysimeter installation. The meteorological station was equipped with a data logger (CR1000, Campbell science, Logan, UT, USA), combined temperature and humidity sensor at 2 m height (HMP155, Vaisala, Helsinki, Finland), wind speed and
according to the Penman-Monteith equation. The daily crop coefficient (Kc) was calculated by dividing the daily crop evapotranspiration ETc (mm day−1) by the daily reference evapotranspiration ETo (mm day−1) according to FAO paper no. 56 (Allen et al., 2006, 1998). Growing degree days (GDD) were calculated using the base temperature of 10 °C as used previously for grapevines by several authors (Evans et al., 1993; 88
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
Subsequently, the covers were transferred to the uncovered lysimeter tanks and the next day another four days of soil evaporation were measured. Soil evaporation was measured by subtracting the average water consumption of the three covered lysimeters from the average water consumption of the three uncovered lysimeters.
Table 1 Seasonal ETc, ETo and irrigation amounts. 'Cabernet sauvignon', 'Kida' vineyard.2012–2017. Irrigation field (mm season-1)
Irrigation lysimeters(mm season-1)
ETo(mm season-1)
ETc(mm season-1)
Year
——— 64 53 39 25 33 43
——— 1571 1326 1206 1403 1270 1355
1205 1321 1203 1197 1322 1173 1237
780 746 698 671 668 724 715
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Avarage
2.8. Yield, must composition and pruning mass Each of the six lysimeter-grown vines and the six adjacent fieldgrown vines were harvested separately. Total yield was weighed and the number of bunches per vine was recorded. One hundred berries from lysimeter-grown vines and from field-grown vines were randomly sampled, and berry mass was determined. After weighing the berries, they were crushed, and the pH and sugar content (TSS) of the must was measured (after filtration). During the winter period, the pruning mass of each of the lysimeter-grown and field-grown vines was recorded separately.
direction sensor at 10 m height (05103LM, Young, Traverse City, MI, USA), solar radiation sensor at 2 m height (CM11, Kipp & zonen, Delft, The Netherlands) and automatic rainfall gauge (00.15189.002 000, Lambrecht, Gottingen, Germany).
3. Results 2.4. Leaf Area Index measurements
3.1. Crop and reference evapotranspiration and crop coefficient
Leaf Area Index (LAI) of the six lysimeter-grown vines and of the six adjacent field-grown vines was measured weekly during each growing season using a canopy analysis system (SunScan model SS1-R3-BF3; Delta-T Devices, Cambridge, UK). This system, which uses a line quantum sensor array of 64 sensors, sensitive to photosynthetic active radiation (PAR), was operated using the standard protocol recommended by the manufacturer, and all measurements were conducted while the zenith angle was below 30°. Each sample comprised 16 equally-spaced observations (10 cm apart), starting from the center of the row to half the distance between adjacent rows, with the sensor array positioned parallel to the rows. The LAI values obtained by this method were compared with measurements obtained after destructive defoliation of leaves from 39 vines (3 cultivars from 6 sites), using an area meter (model 3100; Li-Cor, Lincoln, Nebraska). The two measurement methods were found to be highly correlated with a linear relationship (S4, R2 = 0.922; P < 0.001). For more information about LAI measurements see Netzer et al., (2009).
The seasonal course of crop and reference evapotranspiration was similar across the growing seasons (Fig. 1a-d). Measured crop evapotranspiration, ETc, was at its minimum at the beginning of the growing season (DOY 90–110, budbreak) with values of 1.0–1.5 mm day−1. From budbreak onwards, a constant increase in ETc was recorded until the middle of stage II (DOY 190–210), reaching values of 4–6 mm day−1. Subsequently, a constant decline in ETc was recorded, reaching values of 3–4 mm day−1 at harvest and 1.5–2 mm day−1 in early fall (DOY 280–300, Fig. 1a-d). The seasonal sum of ETc was similar across the trial years (668–780 mm season−1), averaging 715 mm season−1 (Table 1). The seasonal trend of the calculated reference evapotranspiration (ETo) was similar to that of ETc, but of smaller magnitude (higher values during budbreak and fall). ETo values at budbreak were 3–4 mm day−1, rising to a peak of 6–8 mm day−1 during the middle of stage II (DOY 190–210) and then decreasing to 3.5 - 4.5 mm day-1 during early fall (DOY 280–300, Fig. 1a-d). The seasonal sum of ETo was steady over the trial years (1173–1321 mm season−1), averaging 1237 mm season−1 (Table 1). Except for a few occasions (mainly at 2013 DOY 215, Fig. 1a), the calculated ETo values were higher than the measured ETc values. The seasonal irrigation amounts applied to lysimeter vines exceeded the sum of ETo by 9.5%, on average, according to the irrigation plan. Field vines were irrigated with 43 mm season−1 (Table 1) from DOY 180 to DOY 200, an RDI irrigation strategy similar to that being applied to the local commercial vineyards. The seasonal pattern of Kc was similar across the growing seasons (Fig. 1e-h). Kc was minimal at the beginning of the growing season (DOY 90–110), in the range 0.15 - 0.25, then increased gradually, reaching maximum values of 0.6 - 0.8 at the middle of stage II (DOY 190–210). Subsequently, a constant decline in Kc was recorded, with values of 0.35 - 0.55 in early fall (DOY 280–300, Fig. 1e-h). The effect of hedging and catch wire lifting are reflected in the sharp decline in Kc (Fig. 1e DOY 215, Fig. 1g DOY 240, Fig. 1h DOY 145). A strong seconddegree polynomial relationship was found between Kc and DOY (R2 = 0.92, Fig. 2a) between crop coefficient and GDD (R2 = 0.9, Fig. 2b).
2.5. Stem water potential measurements Midday stem water potential (Ψs) of the six lysimeter-grown vines and the six adjacent field-grown vines was measured weekly at solar noon (from 12:00 to 14:30). The measurements were conducted using a pressure chamber (model Arimad 3000, MRC, Hulon, Israel) according to the procedures of Boyer (1995). One sunlit, mature, fully-expanded leaf from each vine was double bagged 2 h prior to measurement with plastic bags covered with aluminum foil. The time elapsing between leaf excision and chamber pressurization was less than 15 s. In the fieldgrown vines, measurements were conducted at the same time, one day before irrigation (irrigation was applied once a week). 2.6. Phenological stages The growing season was divided into three phenological stages as defined by Kennedy (2002): Stage I - from full bloom to bunch closure, stage II - from bunch closure to veraison (color change to red) and stage III - from veraison to harvest.
3.2. Grapevine phenology, vegetative growth and water status
2.7. Soil evaporation measurements
The phenological stages occurred at similar dates across the growing seasons (Fig. 3a-h). Full bloom was recorded at DOY 125–135, bunch closure at DOY 160–175, veraison at DOY 210–215 and harvest at DOY 245 - 260. No pronounced differences were recorded between the phenological development of lysimeter vines and that of adjacent field vines.
On two different occasions during each growing season, the soil surface of three lysimeter tanks was covered with white plastic sheets, while the soil surface of the other three lysimeter tanks remained uncovered. Soil evaporation in all lysimeters was measured for four days. 89
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
(Fig. 3e–h). 3.3. Yield and must composition The yield of the lysimeter vines (7.5 kg vine−1) was 50% higher compared to that of field vines (Table 2) nevertheless it was still in the range of yields reported by local commercial vineyards (5–7.8 kg vine−1). Bunch number of lysimeter vines was 8% higher compared to that of field vines, both of them representative of vines in commercial vineyards in the region. Similarly, the berry mass of lysimeter vines was 40% higher than that of field vines (Table 2), while the number of berries per bunch was similar in lysimeter and field vines. While the TSS of field vines was adequate for production of dry red wine (24.4° Brix), the TSS of lysimeter vines was lower (20.1° Brix). Acid level was similar in both lysimeter and field vines, and was adequate for dry red wine production (Table 2). 3.4. Leaf area index and crop coefficient relationship The multi-seasonal linear correlation between LAI and Kc was strong and significant (Fig. 4, R2 = 0.66, P < 0.0001). Since, as described above, there is a rapid increase in leaf area followed by stabilization, most of the LAI values used in the correlation are in the range of 0.8 1.3 m2 m−2. 3.5. Evaporation and transpiration relationship Evaporation remained relatively stable during the growing season (1.5–3.7 L day−1), and the average percent evaporation from total water consumption was 18% (Table 3). At the beginning and end of the growing season (April, October), when evapotranspiration values were low (7.0–7.5 L day−1), the percent evaporation from total water consumption was 21–38% (Table 3), while during the main growing period (May to September), when ET was high (9.9–25.5 L day−1), the percent evaporation from total evapotranspiration was 9–15% (Table 3). 4. Discussion Fig. 2. (a) Development of crop coefficient (Kc) as a function of day of year. (b) Development of crop coefficient (Kc) as a function of growing degree days.Phenological stages (I, II, III) are marked by dashed lines. Each point is the mean of six lysimeters. Vertical bar denotes one standard error. Measured from 2012 to 2017 in a 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard, Kida Israel.
This experiment was intentionally conducted in a commercial vineyard and avoiding construction of lysimeters in the first border row, even though considerable technical difficulties were expected. This approach reflected our desire to measure water consumption of wine grapevines in a way that most accurately represents water consumption of "real" vines growing in "real" commercial vineyard conditions. Similarly, canopy area and water status were always compared between lysimeter vines and field vines.
The seasonal course of LAI of lysimeter and field vines was similar along the growing seasons (Fig. 3a-d). A steep increase in LAI was recorded from budbreak until the middle of stage I (DOY 150–165), at which LAI reached a maximum of 0.9 - 1.2 m2 m−2 (exceptionally high values of 1.7 m2 m−2 were measured during 2016). Subsequently, LAI stabilized in both lysimeter and field vines (Fig. 3a-d). The average LAI of lysimeter vines across all trial years exceeded that of field vines by 14%. The canopy hedging effect on lysimeters vines is reflected by a sharp decline in LAI values at 2013 DOY 205–220 (Fig. 3a) and at 2015 DOY 195 (Fig. 3c). The lifting of catch wires caused a 42% reduction in measured LAI in lysimeter vines and a 35% reduction in field vines (DOY 150, Fig. 3d). The average pruning mass of field vines was 52% lower than that of lysimeter vines (Table 2). Stem water potential (Ψs) of lysimeter vines remained steady along the growing season, in the range -0.35 MPa to-0.6 MPa (Fig. 3e-h). On two exceptional occasions (Fig. 3e DOY 128, Fig. 3f DOY 142) Ψs of lysimeter vines declined to -0.7 MPa. The Ψs of the field vines was high (-0.6 MPa to-0.85 MPa) during spring and then consistently decreased until harvest, reaching -1.4 MPa to-1.6 MPa (Fig. 3e-h). During 2013 and 2015, Ψs of field vines resembled that of lysimeter vines until the end of stage I (DOY 170), while in 2014 and 2016 it was -0.2 MPa lower, on average, from the beginning of the growing season
4.1. Crop and reference evapotranspiration and crop coefficient The ETc of 715 mm season−1 recorded in this study was measured in a region with total ETo of 1237 mm season−1, thus the seasonal ETc/ ETo ratio is 0.58. This level of water consumption is in the range reported in the literature for wine grapevines. López-Urrea et al. (2012) reported water consumption (using weighting lysimeters) of 477 mm season−1 for "Tempranillo" grapevines grown under climatic conditions of ETo of 895 mm season−1 giving an ETc/ETo ratio of 0.53. For the same grape cultivar, Picón-Toro et al. (2012) obtained (using weighting lysimeters) water consumption of 834 mm season−1 with ETo of 1159 mm season−1 giving an ETc/ETo ratio of 0.72. It is important to note that both López-Urrea et al. (2012) and Picón-Toro et al. (2012) measured minimal evaporation of dry soil, while in the current study the soil was always completely wet (accepted procedure for drainage lysimeters irrigated at 1-hour intervals). For comparison, Evans et al. (1993) reported seasonal water consumption (using drainage lysimeters) of 387, 431, 432 mm season−1 for "White Riesling", "Chenin Blanc" and "Cabernet Sauvignon". The cumulative seasonal ETo was 90
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
Fig. 3. (a – d) Seasonal curves of canopy development (LAI) in lysimeter vines (closed circles) and field vines (open circles). (e – f) Seasonal curves of midday stem water potential (Ψs) in lysimeter vines (closed circles) and field vines (open circles). Phenological stages (I, II, III) are marked by dashed lines. Each point is the mean of six vines. Vertical bar denotes one standard error. Measured from 2013 to 2016 in a 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard, Kida Israel.
908 mm season−1, giving ETc/ETo ratios of 0.43, 0.47 and 0.48, respectively. Based primarily on the results of gravimetric soil sampling, Doorenbos and Pruitt (1977) reported that vineyard ETc may vary from 650 to 1000 mm year−1. The maximal Kc values below 1 obtained in this study are reasonable for VSP-trained wine grapevines with limited canopy area. Our
maximal Kc values of 0.8 - 0.9 are in good agreement with other reported Kc values for wine grapevine cultivars. Picón-Toro et al. (2012) reported maximal Kcb (dry soil) values around 1 for "Tempranillo" (using weighting lysimeters). Intrigliolo et al. (2009) obtained maximal Kcb values of 0.55 for field grown "Riesling" (using a canopy chamber). Dragoni et al. (2006) calculated maximal Kcb values of 1–1.2 for field 91
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
Table 2 Yield components and pruning mass of lysimetres and field vines, 'Cabernet sauvignon', 'Kida' vineyard, 2013 - 2017. pH
TSS(oBrix)
Berries(number bunch-1)
Berry mass(g)
Pruning mass(kg vine-1)
Bunch(number vine-1)
Yield(kg vine-1)
3.30 ± 0.04 3.35 ± 0.05
20.1 ± 0.8 24.4 ± 0.4
82.7 ± 7.5 86.4 ± 2.4
1.67 ± 0.08 1.22 ± 0.13
2.1 ± 0.05 1.0 ± 0.23
72.7 ± 10.1 64.1 ± 7.7
7.5 ± 1.9 5.0 ± 1.5
Values represent means (n = 30, 6 vines * 5 years), except for yield and bunch number that has missing data in 2015.
vines. The maximal LAI values measured in this study (0.9 to 1.7 m2 m−2) are in the range of LAI values of field-grown vines trained on a VSP trellis system reported by others, who used different measuring methods. Intrigliolo and Castel (2010) reported LAI of 0.6 to 1.6 m2 m−2 in "Tempranillo" vines. Romero et al. (2010) measured maximal LAI of 2.2 m2 m−2 in "Monastrell" vines. Edwards and Clingeleffer (2013) reported LAI in the range 1.7 to 2.9 m2 m−2 in "Cabernet Sauvignon" vines. Johnson et al. (2003) obtained LAI in the range 0.4 - 2.8 m2 m−2 in four different cultivars ("Chardonnay", "Cabernet Sauvignon", "Cabernet Franc" and "Sangiovese"). Buesa et al. (2017) measured LAI in the range 0.9 to 2.1 m2 m−2 in "Muscat of Alexandria". Intrigliolo et al. (2009) reported maximal LAI of 1.5 m2 m−2 in "Riesling". Picón-Toro et al. (2012) reported LAI values above 4 m2 m−2 in "Tempranillo" VSP-trained vines. These authors stated that the development of their vineyard is greater than in most winemaking areas, but their values are almost double those mentioned above and seem to be a bit overestimated. The range of Ψs values measured in this study in the lysimeter vines (-0.3 to -0.65 MPa), are typical for non-stressed grapevines. Picón-Toro et al. (2012) reported Ψs of -0.35 to -0.8 MPa in non-stressed "Tempranillo" vines. Patakas et al. (2005) obtained Ψs of -0.4 to -0.6 MPa in non-stressed "Malagouzia" vines. Buesa et al. (2017) measured Ψs of -0.4 to -0.8 MPa in non-stressed "Muscat of Alexandria" vines. PicónToro et al. (2012) calculated that in grapevines, evapotranspiration is maximal down to Ψs of -0.5 to -0.6 MPa, and then begins to decrease. Our lysimeter vines maintained Ψs of -0.6 MPa and higher throughout all growing seasons, meaning that their evapotranspiration was kept maximal as required by FAO paper 56 for ETc calculation (Allen et al., 1998). The seasonal curve of declining Ψs measured in this study in the field-grown vines is typical for deficit-irrigated vineyards located in semi-arid regions (Intrigliolo and Castel, 2010; Munitz et al., 2016; Romero et al., 2010). The similar Ψs of field-grown vines and lysimeter vines during the spring period demonstrates that lysimeter vines represent field-grown vines during high water availability periods.
Fig. 4. Relationship between leaf area index (LAI) and crop coefficient (Kc). Each point is the mean LAI of six vines, and the mean Kc of weekly water consumption of six lysimeters. Vertical and horizontal bars denote one standard error. Measured from 2012 to 2017 in a 'Cabernet Sauvignon' vineyard, Kida Israel.
Table 3 Evapotranspiration, transpiration and calculated evaporation. 'Cabernet sauvignon', 'Kida' vineyard. 2012–2017. E/ ET (%)
Evaporation L day-1))
Transpirationsoil surface coverd (L day-1)
Evapotranspirationsoil surface uncoverd (L day-1)
21 13 15 9 12 38
1.46 ± 0.21 1.27 ± 0.18 3.72 ± 0.59 2.40 ± 1.00 1.87 ± 0.50 2.88 ± 0.39
5.55 ± 0.55 8.68 ± 0.86 21.81 ± 0.69 22.17 ± 1.49 13.31 ± 0.77 4.67 ± 0.41
7.01 ± 0.56 9.95 ± 0.95 25.52 ± 0.83 24.58 ± 0.79 15.12 ± 0.46 7.55 ± 0.68
Month
Apr May Jun Jul Sep Oct
4.3. Leaf area index and crop coefficient relationship grown Vitis labruscana "Concord" vines, but their canopy was very wide (LAI = 2.5 m2 m−2). Carrasco-Benavides et al. (2012) calculated (using eddy correlation) maximal Kc values of 0.7 for field-grown "Merlot" vines. Allen and Pereira (2009) calculated maximal Kc values of 0.7 0.75 for wine grapes (using a stress factor of 0.7). Higher values of Kc (above 1) have been reported for table grapes with a much wider canopy (LAI = 5 m2 m−2, Netzer et al., 2009). In "Thompson seedless", Williams et al. (2003) found maximal Kc above 1, and in "Superior Seedless", Netzer et al., (2009) and Wang et al. (2018) reported maximal Kc of 1.2 - 1.3.
The linear correlation between LAI and Kc reported in this study has a steeper slope (higher Kc for similar LAI) than that of relationships reported for table grapes (Netzer et al., 2009; Williams and Ayars, 2005). This is because the VSP trellis systems used for wine grapes receive much greater sun exposure compared to the open gable / overhead trellis systems used for table grapes. As mentioned above, Kc is affected by canopy shape and trellising architecture (Williams and Ayars, 2005; Williams and Fidelibus, 2016). We converted the canopy cover percentage data of López-Urrea et al. (2012) to LAI, using correlations from Williams and Ayars (2005) and converted their basal crop coefficient (Kcb, only transpiration) to crop coefficient (Kc, transpiration + evaporation, using their own data). The resulting LAI / Kc relationship resembles our correlation, but with a decline in the slope. The slope of the LAI / Kcb relationship obtained for wine grapes by Picón-Toro et al. (2012) is quite similar to slopes reported previously for table grapes (Netzer et al., 2009; Williams and Ayars, 2005). Even after adding 18% to Kcb in order to transform it to Kc (18% of average evaporation from total evapotranspiration according to our data in Table 3.) the slope of the Picón-Toro et al. (2012) LAI / Kc relationship is still quite similar to that of table grapes. This shift can be caused by
4.2. Leaf area index and water potential Grapevine canopy development, occurring mainly from bud break till the end of stage I (bunch closure), as observed in this study, is consistent with our former results (Munitz et al., 2016), and has also been reported by others (Ben-Asher et al., 2006; Edwards and Clingeleffer, 2013; Peacock et al., 1987; Picón-Toro et al., 2012; Romero et al., 2010). Similar LAI values of lysimeter and field vines indicate that the lysimeter vines are well representative of field-grown 92
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
overestimation of LAI, as mentioned above.
Crop Water Requirments. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper, ROME. Ben-Asher, J., Tsuyuki, I., Bravdo, B.-A., Sagih, M., 2006. Irrigation of grapevines with saline water I. Leaf area index, stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis. Agric. Water Manag. 83, 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2006.01. 002. Ben-Gal, A., Kool, D., Agam, N., van Halsema, G.E., Yermiyahu, U., Yafe, A., Presnov, E., Erel, R., Majdop, A., Zipori, I., Segal, E., Rüger, S., Zimmermann, U., Cohen, Y., Alchanatis, V., Dag, A., 2010. Whole-tree water balance and indicators for short-term drought stress in non-bearing “Barnea” olives. Agric. Water Manag. 98, 124–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.08.008. Boyer, J., 1995. Water Relations of Plants and Soils. Acdemic Press, San Diego, CA, USA. Bravdo, B., Hepner, Y., Loinger, C., Cohen, S., Tabacman, H., 1985. Effect of irrigation and crop level on growth, yield and wine quality of Cabernet Sauvignon. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 36, 132–139. Buesa, I., Pérez, D., Castel, J., Intrigliolo, D., Castel, J., 2017. Effect of deficit irrigation on vine performance and grape composition of Vitis vinifera L. Cv. Muscat of Alexandria. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 23, 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajgw.12280. Bureau, S.M., Baumes, R.L., Razungles, A.J., 2000. Effects of vine or bunch shading on the glycosylated flavor precursors in grapes of Vitis vinifera L. Cv. Syrah. J. Agric. Food Chem. 48, 1290–1297. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf990507x. Carrasco-Benavides, M., Ortega-Farías, S., Lagos, L.O., Kleissl, J., Morales, L., PobleteEcheverría, C., Allen, R.G., 2012. Crop coefficients and actual evapotranspiration of a drip-irrigated Merlot vineyard using multispectral satellite images. Irrig. Sci. 30, 485–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-012-0379-4. Chaves, M., Zarrouk, O., Francisco, R., Costa, J., Santos, T., Regalado, A., Rodrigues, M., Lopes, C., 2010. Grapevine under deficit irrigation: hints from physiological and molecular data. Ann. Bot. 105, 661–676. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcq030. Chorti, E., Guidoni, S., Ferrandino, A., Novello, V., 2010. Effect of different cluster sunlight exposure levels on ripening and anthocyanin accumulation in Nebbiolo grapes. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 61, 23–30. Consoli, S., D’Urso, G., Toscano, A., 2006. Remote sensing to estimate ET-fluxes and the performance of an irrigation district in southern Italy. Agric. Water Manag. 81, 295–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2005.04.008. Deidda, P., Dettori, S., Filigheddu, M., Virdis, F., Pala, M., 1990. Lysimetric analysis of water requirements for young table-olive trees. Acta Hortic. 286, 259–261. Di, H., Cameron, K., 2002. Nitrate leaching in temperate agroecosystems: sources, factors and mitigating strategies. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosystems 64, 237–256. https://doi.org/ 10.1023/A:1021471531188. Doorenbos, J., Pruitt, W., 1977. Guidelines for predicting crop water requirements. FAO Irrig. Drain. Pap. 24, 144. Dragoni, D., Lakso, A.N., Piccioni, R.M., Tarara, J.M., 2006. Transpiration of grapevines in the humid northeastern United States. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 57, 460–467. Edwards, E.J., Clingeleffer, P.R., 2013. Interseasonal effects of regulated deficit irrigation on growth, yield, water use, berry composition and wine attributes of Cabernet Sauvignon grapevines. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 19, 261–276. https://doi.org/10. 1111/ajgw.12027. Esteban, M.A., Villanueva, M.J., Lissarrague, J.R., 2001. Effect of irrigation on changes in the anthocyanin composition of the skin of cv Tempranillo (Vitis vinifera L) grape berries during ripening. J. Sci. Food Agric. 81, 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 1097-0010(200103)81:4<409::AID-JSFA830>3.0.CO;2-H. Evans, R.G., Spayd, S.E., Wample, R.L., Kroeger, M.W., Mahan, M.O., 1993. Water use of Vitis vinifera grapes in Washington*. Agric. Water Manag. 23, 109–124. https://doi. org/10.1016/0378-3774(93)90035-9. Fereres, E., Evans, R.G., 2006. Irrigation of fruit trees and vines: an introduction. Irrig. Sci. 24, 55–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-005-0019-3. Gao, Y., Cahoon, G.A., 1994. Cluster shading effects on fruit quality, fruit skin color, and anthocyanin content and composition in Reliance (Vitis hybrid). Vitis 33, 205–209. García-Tejero, I.F., Hernandez, A., Rodriguez, V., Ponce, J., Ramos, V., Muriel, J., DuranZuazo, V.H., 2015. Estimating almond crop coefficients and physiological response to water stress in semiarid environments (SW Spain). J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 17, 1255–1266. Girona, J., Marsal, J., Mata, M., Del Campo, J., Basile, B., 2009. Phenological sensitivity of berry growth and composition of Tempranillo grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.) to water stress. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 15, 268–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.17550238.2009.00059.x. Girona, J., del Campo, J., Mata, M., Lopez, G., Marsal, J., 2011. A comparative study of apple and pear tree water consumption measured with two weighing lysimeters. Irrig. Sci. 29, 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-010-0217-5. Grimes, D.W., Williams, L.E., 1990. Irrigation effects on plant water relations and productivity of Thompson seedless grapevines. Crop Sci. 30, 255–260. https://doi.org/ 10.2135/cropsci1990.0011183X003000020003x. Heilmeier, H., Wartinger, A., Erhard, M., Zimmermann, R., Horn, R., Schulze, E.D., 2002. Soil drought increases leaf and whole-plant water use of Prunus dulcis grown in the Negev Desert. Oecologia 130, 329–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420100808. Intrigliolo, D.S., Castel, J.R., 2010. Response of grapevine cv. “Tempranillo” to timing and amount of irrigation: water relations, vine growth, yield and berry and wine composition. Irrig. Sci. 28, 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-009-0164-1. Intrigliolo, D.S., Lakso, A.N., Piccioni, R.M., 2009. Grapevine cv. ‘riesling’ water use in the northeastern United States. Irrig. Sci. 27, 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271008-0140-1. Jagtap, S., Jones, J., 1989. Stability of crop coefficients under different climate and irrigation Management Practices *. Irrig. Sci. 10, 231–244. Johnson, L., Roczen, D., Youkhana, S., Nemani, R., Bosch, D., 2003. Mapping vineyard leaf area with multispectral satellite imagery. Comput. Electron. Agric. 38, 33–44. Keller, M., 2005. Deficit irrigation and vine mineral nutrition. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 56, 267–283.
4.4. Evaporation and transpiration relationship The average percent evaporation from total evapotranspiration measured in this study was 18%. This is in good agreement with evaporation values reported by others in vineyards. In "Tempranillo" vines, Montoro et al. (2016) calculated 26–31% evaporation (using FAO 56 methodology) from total evapotranspiration. In "Cabernet Sauvignon" vines, Kool et al. (2014) reported 8–17% evaporation (using eddy correlation) of total evapotranspiration. In table grapes with a much wider canopy that shades the soil, lower evaporation/evapotranspiration ratios were found. In "Thompson seedless", 13% was reported (Williams and Fidelibus, 2016), and in "Superior Seedless", 7% (Netzer et al., 2009). It is important to note that our evaporation results overestimate vineyard evaporation since our lysimeter soil was always wet; nevertheless, our evaporation results underestimate vineyard evaporation since our lysimeter soil surface is only 1.1 m2 while the soil surface per vine in the vineyard is 4.5 m2. 5. Conclusions The water potential and all vegetative parameters measured in this study clearly show that our lysimeter vines demonstrate similar physiological performance to that of field-grown vines under high water availability conditions, and can serve as a reference model vines for field-grown grapevine irrigation. The robust multiyear relationship between LAI and Kc proves that measuring the canopy area of wine grapevines is a reliable approach for estimating their Kc. The LAI to Kc relationship established in this study can be used as a basis for developing a comprehensive irrigation model for wine grapevines that integrates both climatic conditions and canopy area. Measuring canopy area in a vineyard (and converting it to Kc) combined with meteorological data from an adjacent weather station (ETo) will enable calculation of the ETc of the vineyard using the equation: ETc = ETo* Kc. Applying this irrigation model to wine grapevines, in which a certain drought stress is desirable, requires the incorporation of a stress factor (Ks) as explained by Munitz et al. (2016). Acknowledgments This study was sponsored by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Israel and the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Israel and the Israeli Wine Grape Council. The authors thank to the dedicated growers : Yoav David, Itamar Weis, Yedidia Spitz and Shlomi Choen. We particularly thank Yechezkel Harroch, Bentzi Green, Yossi Shteren, Alon Katz, Ben hazut, David Kimchi, Gilad gersman, Alon chores, Yedidia sweid, Daniel Mintz and Yair hayat for assisting in the field measurements and to Ziv Charit from Netafim for the help with the vineyard irrigation system. We thank the team of Teperberg Winery, Udi Gliksman, Shiki Rauchberger and Olivier Fratty for their collaboration. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary material related to this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2019.03.051. References Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., 2009. Estimating crop coefficients from fraction of ground cover and height. Irrig. Sci. 28, 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-009-0182-z. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D., Smith, M., 1998. Crop Evapotranspiration. Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. FAO irrigation and drainage paper no. 56, FAO irrigation and drainage paper no. 56, ROME. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja. 2010.12.001. Allen, R.G., Pereira, L., Raes, D., 2006. Crop Evapotranspiration. Guidlines for Computing
93
Agricultural Water Management 219 (2019) 86–94
S. Munitz, et al.
south-western Spain. Irrig. Sci. 30, 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-0120351-3. Prior, L.D., Grieve, A.M., 1987. Water use and irrigation requirements of grapevine. Sixth Australian Wine Industry Technical Conference. pp. 165–168. Ro, H.M., 2001. Water use of young “Fuji” apple trees at three soil moisture regimes in drainage lysimeters. Agric. Water Manag. 50, 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0378-3774(01)00099-3. Romero, P., Fernández-Fernández, J.I., Martinez-Cutillas, A., 2010. Physiological thresholds for efficient regulated deficit-irrigation management in winegrapes grown under semiarid conditions. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 61, 300–312. Romero, P., Gil-Muñoz, R., del Amor, F.M., Valdés, E., Fernández, J.I., Martinez-Cutillas, A., 2013. Regulated Deficit Irrigation based upon optimum water status improves phenolic composition in Monastrell grapes and wines. Agric. Water Manag. 121, 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2013.01.007. Rozenstein, O., Haymann, N., Kaplan, G., Tanny, J., 2018. Estimating cotton water consumption using a time series of Sentinel-2 imagery. Agric. Water Manag. 207, 44–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.05.017. Trambouze, W., Voltz, M., 2001. Measurement and modelling of the transpiration of a Mediterranean vineyard. Agric. For. Meteorol 107, 153–166. https://doi.org/10. 1016/S0168-1923(00)00226-4. Van Zyl, J., Van Huyssteen, L., 1980. Comparative studies on wine grapes on different trellising systems: I. Consumptive water use South African. J. Enol. Vitic. 1, 7–14. Vanino, S., Pulighe, G., Nino, P., De Michele, C., Bolognesi, S., D’Urso, G., 2015. Estimation of evapotranspiration and crop coefficients of tendone vineyards using multi-sensor remote sensing data in a mediterranean environment. Remote Sens. (Basel) 7, 14708–14730. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs71114708. Wang, S., Zhu, G., Xia, D., Ma, J., Han, T., Ma, T., Zhang, K., Shang, S., 2018. The characteristics of evapotranspiration and crop coefficients of an irrigated vineyard in arid Northwest China. Agric. Water Manag. 212, 388–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.agwat.2018.09.023. Watts, D.G., Hergert, G.W., Nichols, J.T., 1991. Plant and Environment Interactions. Nitrogen Leaching Losses from Irrigated Orchardgrass on Sandy Soils. J. Environ. Qual. 20, 355–362. Williams, L.E., Araujo, F.J., 2002. Correlations among predawn leaf, midday leaf, and midday stem water potential and their correlations with other measures of soil and plant water status in Vitis vinifera. J. Am. Soc. 127, 448–454. Williams, L.E., Ayars, J.E., 2005. Water use of Thompson Seedless grapevines as affected by the application of gibberellic acid (GA3) and trunk girdling - Practices to increase berry size. Agric. For. Meteorol. 129, 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet. 2004.11.007. Williams, L.E., Fidelibus, M.W., 2016. Measured and estimated water use and crop coefficients of grapevines trained to overhead trellis systems in California’s San Joaquin Valley. Irrig. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-016-0513-9. Williams, L.E., Phene, C.J., Grimes, D.W., Trout, T.J., 2003. Water use of mature Thompson Seedless grapevines in California. Irrig. Sci. 22, 11–18. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s00271-003-0067-5. Yunusa, I.A.M., Walker, R.R., Blackmore, D.H., 1997. Characterisation of water use by Sultana grapevines (Vitis vinifera L.) on their own roots or on Ramsey rootstock dripirrigated with water of different salinities. Irrig. Sci. 17, 77–86. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s002710050025. Yunusa, I.A.M., Walker, R.R., Lu, P., 2004. Evapotranspiration components from energy balance, sapflow and microlysimetry techniques for an irrigated vineyard in inland Australia. Agric. For. Meteorol. 127, 93–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet. 2004.07.001.
Keller, M., Smithyman, R., Mills, L., 2008. Interactive effects of deficit irrigation and crop load on Cabernet Sauvignon in an arid climate. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 59, 221–234. https://doi.org/10.5344/ajev.2011.10103. Kool, D., Ben-Gal, A., Agam, N., Šimůnek, J., Heitman, J., Sauer, T., Lazarovitch, N., 2014. Spatial and diurnal below canopy evaporation in a desert vineyard: measurements and modeling. Water Resour. Res. 50, 7035–7049. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 2014WR015409. Lopes, C., Monteiro, A., Rückert, F.E., Gruber, B., Steinberg, B., Schultz, H.R., Braun, P., Schmid, J., Campos, I., Neale, C.M.U., Calera, A., Balbontín, C., González-Piqueras, J., Ferreyra, R., Sellés, G., Ruiz, R., Sellés, Im., 2010. Assessing satellite-based basal crop coefficients for irrigated grapes (Vitis vinifera L.). Agric. Water Manag. 98, 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.07.011. López-Urrea, R., Montoro, a., Mañas, F., López-Fuster, P., Fereres, E., 2012. Evapotranspiration and crop coefficients from lysimeter measurements of mature ‘Tempranillo’ wine grapes. Agric. Water Manag. 112, 13–20. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.agwat.2012.05.009. Lorite, I., Santos, C., Testi, L., Fereres, E., 2012. Design and construction of a large weighing lysimeter in an almond orchard. Span. J. Agric. Res. 10, 238. https://doi. org/10.5424/sjar/2012101-243-11. Medrano, H., Escalona, J.M., Cifre, J., Bota, J., Flexas, J., 2003. A ten-year study on the physiology of two Spanish grapevine cultivars under field conditions: effects of water availability from leaf photosynthesis to grape yield and quality. Funct. Plant Biol. 30, 607–619. https://doi.org/10.1071/FP02110. Montoro, A., Mañas, F., López-Urrea, R., 2016. Transpiration and evaporation of grapevine, two components related to irrigation strategy. Agric. Water Manag. 177, 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.07.005. Morrison, J.C., Noble, A.C., 1990. The effects of leaf and cluster shading on the composition of Cabernet Sauvignon grapes and on fruit and wine sensory properties. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 41, 193–200. Mpelasoka, B., Behboudian, M., Green, S., 2001. Water use, yield and fruit quality of lysimeter-grown apple trees: responses to deficit irrigation and to crop load. Irrig. Sci. 20, 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002710100041. Munitz, S., Netzer, Y., Schwartz, A., 2016. Sustained and regulated deficit irrigation of field-grown Merlot grapevines. Aust. J. Grape Wine Res. 23, 87–94. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/ajgw.12241. Netzer, Y., Yao, C., Shenker, M., Bravdo, B.-A., Schwartz, A., 2009. Water use and the development of seasonal crop coefficients for Superior Seedless grapevines trained to an open-gable trellis system. Irrig. Sci. 27, 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00271-008-0124-1. Netzer, Y., Shenker, M., Schwartz, A., 2014. Effects of irrigation using treated wastewater on table grape vineyards: dynamics of sodium accumulation in soil and plant. Irrig. Sci. 32, 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-014-0430-8. Oliver, H., Sene, K., 1992. Energy and water balances of developing vines. Agric. For. Meteorol. 61, 167–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1923(92)90048-9. Patakas, A., Noitsakis, B., Chouzouri, A., 2005. Optimization of irrigation water use in grapevines using the relationship between transpiration and plant water status. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 106, 253–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2004.10.013. Peacock, W., Christensen, L., Andris, H., 1987. Development of a drip irrigation schedule for average canopy vineyards in the San Joaquin valley. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 38, 113–119. Picón, J., Uriarte, D., Mancha, L.A., Blanco, J., Prieto, M.H., 2012. Seasonal crop coefficients and relationships with measures of canopy development for “Tempranillo” grapevines in south-western Spain. Acta Hortic. 235–242. Picón-Toro, J., González-Dugo, V., Uriarte, D., Mancha, L., Testi, L., 2012. Effects of canopy size and water stress over the crop coefficient of a “Tempranillo” vineyard in
94